Following publication of the report in the local "news" paper, the Wairarapa Times-Age, regarding the dismissal of serious charges against me, I wrote a request for correction and right of reply:
Regarding the report (31 August 2011, p A4) of Court charges involving me. (The report can be found at the bottom of the page at this link.)
The report is incorrect, and I request that you publish this correction. The charge of Perverting the Course of Justice was not withdrawn as your report states, it was dismissed after the Crown admitted that they had no evidence to offer, and they claimed it wouldn't be in the public interest to proceed with the prosecution. The same two excuses they've recently trotted out in support of another application, to offer no evidence regarding the 18 people charged in the Urewera raids.
The references to my health in the Crown memorandum are directly contradicted by the opinions of the medical professionals. Quotes from their reports can be found at transparencynz.blogspot.com, the website of Transparency in New Zealand, in particular http://transparencynz.blogspot.com/2011/08/stranger-than-fiction-crown-gives-up_04.html
There is not, and has never been any evidence about my health at the time of the offence, or any other evidence of any crime for that matter, and no reason to justify the charge being dropped other than the fact that none of the charges should ever have been laid. There was nothing wrong with my health then and there's nothing wrong with it now, apart from serious depression and ongoing post traumatic stress, from the ongoing campaign of malicious and vexatious, corruptly laid litigation and police bullying and harassment and refusal to acknowledge investigate complaints.
Because a person believes that the Wairarapa police and Court staff are unprofessional to the point of being corrupt doesn't mean the person must have a major mental disorder called "Delusional Disorder" to the degree that this alleged Delusional Disorder" makes it impossible for them to care for themselves, on the grounds that if people attack the "Patient" for saying things, the police will likely ignore the complaint and assist the criminal, as they've done with all the missing child abuse files. Making hundreds of child abuse files "disappear" and claiming they were "lost" is outrageous corruption of the worst possible kind. Claiming that the file regarding the "investigation" into the allegations of fraud regarding the Carterton Community Centre "does not exist" to cover up the fact that the investigation never took place is also corruption of the worst possible kind, because the clients of the former Carterton Community Centre were mainly the disadvantaged and more vulnerable members of the community - stealing from the poor in other words. It's not just me who believes this, there is considerable evidence of it like this report, and this one, and this one, and this one, and this one, and this one. Not to mention this one, or this one, or this one.
This is what the medical professionals actually said regarding my fitness to stand trial:
Two days before the date of the Crown memorandum, stating that the Crown have no evidence to offer, an experienced medical professional wrote:
"Ms Raue presented as pleasant, polite, well groomed and looked physically quite healthy and relaxed." "Her manner was pleasant and quite relaxed throughout the interview and she showed no evidence of any pressure in her thinking. Her speech, while a little speeded at times, was not noticeably pressured and her thought processes were logical and rational throughout the period of the interview. We spent some time discussing the issues of the court, the charges and her intended defence. She was able to explain clearly and rationally the way in which she intends to defend herself against the charge and remained focused on this throughout, without introducing any extraneous or irrelevant material and without displaying any paranoid thought processes in relation to the charges." "Her understanding of the legal issues is very good and she has the ability to formulate and enter a plea and to follow all the matters pertinent to the court." "Overall my impression is that she will be able to interact successfully with the court for the purpose of conducting her defence. In my opinion she is fit to stand trial."
Another wrote: "Her account included a number of persecutory ideas. However on balance, considering her ideas and reviewing the other materials, I do not think Ms Raue has a mental illness, particularly I do not believe that she has a psychotic illness characterised by the development of persecutory delusions." He also says "I would further observe the litigious quality to her presentation means that she has an exaggerated intellectual understanding of court process and would be well capable of following legal process and both entering a plea and instructing a lawyer." Nothing wrong with my health as you can see. These reports, and others, make an absolute mockery of the Crown memorandum, which states: "It is clear that Ms Raue is currently significantly unwell. She is detained in hospital. It is likely that her mental condition influenced her offending. Continuation of the Court process has potential to fuel Ms Raue's delusions and paranoia. It may delay or prevent her recovery." And: "In these circumstances it is considered that continued prosecution of the charge against the accused is not required in the public interest. Subject to any directions from the Court, the Crown intends to offer no evidence in relation to this matter." I was released from the hospital two days after this was written.
There was never any grounds for any of the charges, or evidence to support them, as readers of my website, transparencynz.blogspot.com (which reports the facts accurately and publishes all the supporting evidence) can see for themselves. There was nothing wrong with my health, as the reports quoted above and others prove, apart from depression and stress due to the ongoing campaign of harassment, and unfair treatment, from the local police. What utter rubbish!
A Judicial Inquiry into these matters is urgently required, I have made several applications. The police and the Crown prosecutor have conspired with others to pervert the course of justice by preventing the jury trial going ahead because they know that the local police will once again be proven to be Liars. Read the decision of Judge Behrens QC, after he stopped the trial, at the hearing of five charges involving MP Georgina Beyer, read the complaint to the PCA from lawyer Michael Appleby, this is part of a pattern of corruption.
Lawyer Ken Daniels wrote the following about the pattern of charging me for things I hadn't done, and pursuing ridiculous prosecutions which had no chances of success, and no evidence to support the charges: "I am pleased at the dismissal of a number of charges against you. That is as it should have been in my view. It was always apparent from an early stage that for whatever reason you were a “lightning rod” for Police attention in Carterton. This was, in my view, most unfair to you and unwarranted Police attention resulted in unnecessary charges being laid. On reflection it would have been far better if the Police had been able to discuss any concerns they had directly with you so that those concerns may have been laid to rest in a much more appropriate way.You ask me to confirm that the “bill sticking” charge was re-laid a second time by the Police." "The case was initially set down for hearing but because of the fact that the Police realised that there was a good defence to your case, they asked that the defended hearing be adjourned. The purpose of the adjournment was to see whether or not some sort of promise could be made by you not to write any defamatory material. On that undertaking the Police were going to withdraw the charge against you. Quite appropriately you were not willing to make such a promise and the matter was set down yet again for a hearing. This was on the same charges of “bill sticking” however. It was my memory that when the matter came to Court the officer in charge of the case did not appear and we successfully applied to the Judge to have the charges against you dismissed. We then asked the Police for a letter of apology which was ultimately given in May of 2004. All this was at the time of course that we successfully defended the harassment claim in the civil court made by Mr Feinson."
There has been a long campaign by some local police officers of bullying and harassment against me, and of malicious and vexatious litigation. This is a most serious abuse of powers and abuse of human rights, and abuse of tax payers' hard earned money. - The prosecutors don't seem to have to justify to legal aid or anyone how much all these ridiculous prosecutions costs based on the chances of success, as the defendent does, or the complainant in a civil matter. They seem to have free and unfettered license to pervert the course of justice and drag it out for as long as possible as the police prosecutors in Masterton do, in collaboration with the prosecutor's partner, Court registry officer Liz Harpleton.
Simon Powers and Dame Margaret Bazely's interference into the legal system and legal aid system (in the name of cost cutting) completely ignored the monstrous waste of money through the complete and utter incompetence and corruption of the Wairarapa police prosecutions section, Crown prosecutor Jody Ongley, amicus curiae Bryan Yeoman, lawyer Louise Sziranyi and others.
Please publish the above correction in its entirety. Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Yours sincerely
Katherine Raue
Transparency in New Zealand
Friends of Caring Communities (FOCCers)
__________________________________________________________________________________
Over a week later, after emails addressed correctly being returned with an out of office form response, etc, I rang the editor.
Today (14 September 2011) I received this from "Acting Editor" Heather McCracken:
Hi Ms Raue,
Thank you for your patience while I looked into the issues you raised in your email.
I have now had a chance to review the story published on August 31 and discuss it with the reporter.
Your letter raised a number of matters that were not referred to in the story. Two matters related to the facts which were published in the story.
The first was that the charge of perverting the course of justice was dismissed, rather than withdrawn by the Crown. We have confirmed that the charge was withdrawn, and therefore correctly reported.
The second was that there was no evidence given about your health at the time of the offence. The published story did not refer to evidence related to your health or any details about your health. However, we have confirmed with the police prosecutor that the charge was withdrawn because it was deemed to not be in the public interest, "taking all matters into consideration".
We are therefore happy to publish a correction stating that the charge was withdrawn because it was not deemed to be in the public interest, rather than on health grounds, as stated in the story.
Yours sincerely,
Heather McCracken
Heather McCracken
Acting Editor
Wairarapa Times-Age -
________________________________________________________________________________
This is unacceptable.
Ms McCracken states: "The first was that the charge of perverting the course of justice was dismissed, rather than withdrawn by the Crown. We have confirmed that the charge was withdrawn, and therefore correctly reported."
Firstly, the charge of Perverting the Course of Justice was dismissed under s 347 of the Crimes Act after the prosecutor advised the Court that "the Crown intends to offer no evidence in relation to this matter." The Judge then dismissed the charge under section 347 of the Crimes Act:
Section 347 (4) of the Crimes Act states: "A discharge under this section shall be deemed to be an acquittal." An acquittal. Both charges of the single indictment, Escaping from Custody and Perverting the Course of Justice, were dismissed under this section and so I am deemed to be acquitted of both charges. She is incorrect in her ignorant assertation that either or both of them were "withdrawn", as the evidence shows.
Secondly, you state: "The second was that there was no evidence given about your health at the time of the offence. The published story did not refer to evidence related to your health or any details about your health. However, we have confirmed with the police prosecutor that the charge was withdrawn because it was deemed to not be in the public interest, "taking all matters into consideration".
Again, the editor is in error, because she continues to ignorantly ignore the evidence. The WTA report clearly states the following: "A more serious charge of attempting to pervert the course of justice was withdrawn some weeks ago by the Crown because of Raue's health at the time of the alleged offence." What the article should have said was that I was acquitted of the first count of the indictment for Escaping from Custody last September during the hearing of an application under section 344A of the Crimes Act - after the hearing of that application was abruptly ceased when Crown prosecutor Ms Andrea Ewing had the good sense to withdraw the application we were considering (s 344A) and make an application to the Court for dismissal under s 347, which was granted without hesitation by the equally sensible Judge Barry, after Constable Laura Rhymer's "evidence" was heard - and seen to be rubbish, (link up soon). I was also acquitted of Perverting the Course of Justice when the Crown admitted they had no evidence to offer. The report certainly did mention my health, in fact it inferred that my health was the whole reason for the proceedings being discontinued. This has caused great concern not only to me, but to my friends and family.
The accurate and correct information regarding the acquittal on the Perverting the Course of Justice, including details of the almost identical abrupt cessation of Court proceedings, instigated by the prosecution, of a considerable number of other charges, and full details, in context, regarding my health, can be found at my own website, kate-raue.blogspot.com, and that of Transparency New Zealand: transparencynz.blogspot.com., which the reporter was invited to view prior to publication of the erroneous report, and the editor was invited to view prior to sending me this ridiculous - not to mention distressing email, but both obviously chose not to bother viewing the evidence before rushing off into print.
The editor states in her email: "The second was that there was no evidence given about your health at the time of the offence. The published story did not refer to evidence related to your health or any details about your health. However, we have confirmed with the police prosecutor that the charge was withdrawn because it was deemed to not be in the public interest, "taking all matters into consideration"." Nowhere in the Crown memorandum do the words "taking all matters into consideration" appear. Why make it up? When the Crown memorandum is on our website, (transparencynz.blogspot.com) where it's been for weeks. If there was "no evidence given about your health" as Ms McCracken alleges, why does the report say "A more serious charge of attempting to pervert the course of justice was withdrawn some weeks ago by the Crown because of Raue's health at the time of the alleged offence."?!
Also on our sites is further evidence of the prejudice and bias of local mainstream media.
The inaccurate report, and the refusal to publish my correction or right of reply, are causing considerable distress, not just to me but to the many people who have contacted me concerned for my health. I insist this letter is printed in right of reply, in its entirety, in the 'news' paper and on the website of the Wairarapa Times-Age.
We musn't forget that the Times-Age was manipulative enough to place posters outside all their retail outlets from Featherston to Eketahuna or wherever - two weeks before the election, declaring "Mayoral Candidate in Court Appearance", and then had nothing whatsoever to say when Judge Susan Thomas threw a hissy fit during the hearing, half way through the complainant's evidence, and stalked out of the Court, abandoning the proceedings. Nor was there a peep when the charge was subsequently called before another Judge to be heard and it was found that there was no sign of the complainant, who has a long and colorful history with local police for interfering with witnesses and other matters amounting to perverting the course of justice. Nor was there a peep in the 'news' paper about the three days I was wrongfully imprisoned after yet another Court error regarding these charges, last February.
The Wairarapa Times-Age were manipulative enough to publish the outrageous propaganda below after local drunken bully, Mayor Gary (McGoofy) McPhee and his mate smashed in the door of a local flat and attacked and assaulted the innocent occupants, who were minding their own business at the time, not committing any misdemeanour whatsoever, see for yourself:
No comments:
Post a Comment